Vince Cable set to propose graduate tax

PasturesNew

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

Well, the benefit claimant is merely getting subsistence payments not an investment in their future so, no I wouldn't say that's on a par.

There are a number have been able to secure mortgages, paid for from benefits.

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

The teacher, on the other hand, is a graduate so will already have the 'graduate tax' to pay so it's a bit irrelevant.

The older ones aren't graduates. You used to just go to teaching college with a couple of A levels.

michaels

Quick question - is the proposed graduate tax only for new graduates or would those who have already paid for their degree (or got it for free in the past) have to pay for it again?

tincans

lynzpower wrote: »

It should be income tax and nothing more. Why should someone who earns 50k without a degree pay less tax as someone who earns 50k with a degree? A punishment for bettering yourself is all it is.

Why is someone with a degree "better" than someone without one ?

treliac

PasturesNew wrote: »

The older ones aren't graduates. You used to just go to teaching college with a couple of A levels.

What's the betting most of them were better educated though?

treliac

lynzpower wrote: »

It should be income tax and nothing more. Why should someone who earns 50k without a degree pay less tax as someone who earns 50k with a degree? A punishment for bettering yourself is all it is.

michaels wrote: »

Quick question - is the proposed graduate tax only for new graduates or would those who have already paid for their degree (or got it for free in the past) have to pay for it again?

There are more questions than answers so it seems. Sounds rather unmanageable and ill thought through (bit like the unintended consequences of many of Labour's ideas).

At this rate it'll be a non-starter imo. Would be an administrative nightmare anyway.

Andy_L

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

Well, the options are everyone paying more tax, universities being chronically underfunded, or students paying upfront and having American-style student debts.

Or you could have a graduate tax.

According to VC on the radio this morning he just wants to ensure its one of the options considered by the current review of University funding, as well as the above (and presuemably a few others) rather than a policy proposal

Oldernotwiser

Idiophreak wrote: »

Not all students study to get a better job - and that's the way it should be. To be well educated is an end in itself.

In my view, people shouldn't be required to pay at all for education - as well as being good for the individual, it's good for the country both in terms of enhanced skills and in terms of population control - if I had to choose to pay for 10 people to go to uni and get a degree, or had to pay to put 10 people up in their council house, funding their fags and sky TV for a year, I know which I'd choose.

I wouldn't have a problem funding people through uni with my tax, just as I don't have a problem supporting the disabled, paying for the NHS or paying the bin men. Some things the government has to invest in to give us a better life - surely education is a worthwhile investment.

It's very easy in these discussions to start thinking of higher education as some kind of training program for graduate schemes - personally, I feel universities are much more significant than that.

I totally agree with going to university for education's sake as opposed to job advancement.

I would be happy to fund university out of taxes for a reasonable proportion of the population (perhaps 20%) but I object to the idea that there is more than 40% of the population who would benefit from education at this level. It's this thinking that has led to watered down degree courses and the steep fall in educational standards.

Oldernotwiser

PasturesNew wrote: »

The older ones aren't graduates. You used to just go to teaching college with a couple of A levels.

You used to be able to train as a teacher without A levels. It only became an all graduate profession in the 70s.

FATBALLZ

michaels wrote: »

Quick question - is the proposed graduate tax only for new graduates or would those who have already paid for their degree (or got it for free in the past) have to pay for it again?

It will almost certainly not be retrospective, aside from this being grossly unfair it would also be an administrative nightmare - trawling through the records to see if 95 year old Fred went to university.

IveSeenTheLight

Andy_L wrote: »

The OU's fees are still subsidised - compare the UK costs with what they charge for foreign students

You can say the same with UK universities though.
I am a british citizen, as is my wife and my son.
The fact we live abroad and have done so for more than 3 years, means that if I were to send a child to University in the UK, he would be treated as a foreigner and would incur far greater costs.